Scum 4K UHD (1980) (88 Films) (UK)

[Fat Phil]

Has anyone reached out to 88Films? Because it may be worth making them aware (all polite and friendly, like) that whomever they used to author this disc is an incompetent boob and this dip in encoding quality has most definitely been noticed. Would hate to see this become their new norm.

[Kyle15]

Did they credit whoever encoded this one?

[nicwood]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

Did they credit whoever encoded this one?

Nothing in the booklet this time (probably for good reason) but I’m 99% sure it’s by MJMultimedia. They often, if not always use the same menu layouts for 88’s encodes with weird fonts and a squishy, unfolding pop-up menu on the right side. I checked this with another release that credited them and Scum looks totally like it as well. I’m not aware of other authoring houses doing it like that.

If you look at their website, they showcase the earliest MUBI BDs, many of which had poor encoding and issues, such as Drive My Car (constant bitrate IIRC) and Benedetta with its color space error.

[nicwood]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

Has anyone reached out to 88Films? Because it may be worth making them aware (all polite and friendly, like) that whomever they used to author this disc is an incompetent boob and this dip in encoding quality has most definitely been noticed. Would hate to see this become their new norm.

I haven’t. I can imagine they’re reading this thread though. I did a post about the encode of Miracles: The Canton Godfather and they replied a couple of minutes later, however that was on a more positive note as FiM did that one.

I think they post on Facebook but I’m not registered there. Hopefully this thread is already sufficient.

[nicwood]

88 posted this in their label thread, unrelated to Scum specifically but still somewhat applicable here:

Originally Posted by 88 Films Official

Trust me 4K’s are much more expensive to produce. The transfer typically cost 2 to 3 times more than a 2K/HD transfer. The authoring was initially 5-6 times more expensive than Blu-ray and and hasn’t come down too much, a UHD-100 costs nearly £2000 to glass master and the discs fees are over 4 times the cost of a BD-50.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by nicwood

As promised, here are caps of the 4K disc:

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Oh, dear.

That is a shame.

On one hand, this doesn't seem like the type of film its worth spending big bucks on top tier encoding given the source material since its not exactly a looker, especially when it's already been released in multiple territories on Blu-ray and probably has a limited market that would spring to upgrade.

But on the other hand, you kind of need to if your alternative is going to resolve less than the existing Blu-ray from the same territory does, that many people have already ,as that small market will become even smaller.

[PNguyen]

I had this in my cart the other day, good thing I checked here haha.

[Keoma]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

Has anyone reached out to 88Films? Because it may be worth making them aware (all polite and friendly, like) that whomever they used to author this disc is an incompetent boob...

I believe this is really unkind. Encoding may not be up to FIM's level in this particular case, agreed, but "incompetent boob" is a bit extreme. Much as we would all love this to be true, FIM can not possibly encode every single release, nor can every small label afford them all the time. The point is well taken, but, again, it can be driven across in a kinder manner.

For what it's worth, I think the disc is far from a disaster and I would recommend it. The issues are not a big deal during normal play or unless you are practicing that most futile and unhealthiests of passive sports (that is to say: pixel peeping). I also like the menus and the fact that you get a pop up enabled during the extras, for example. I do not believe I have seen this with any other authoring house. Then again, we really do not know who authored this since there is no credit in the booklet. Maybe this is all in the master, for all we know.

[nicwood]

Originally Posted by Ruined

On one hand, this doesn't seem like the type of film its worth spending big bucks on top tier encoding given the source material since its not exactly a looker, especially when it's already been released in multiple territories on Blu-ray and probably has a limited market that would spring to upgrade.

Every single film, video or series that is released physically deserves to have good encoding irrespective of their artistic merit. There should absolutely be no class consciousness in that regard, whatever the materials, whatever period.

88 decided that Scum is worth investing big bucks into a new scan, HDR grade, sound remixes, extra commissions and the production of a 4K UHD disc. They clearly saw enough sales potential in the film to go "all-in" with it independent of any visual characteristics.

[Fat Phil]

Originally Posted by Keoma

I believe this is really unkind.

And i’m fine with that.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by nicwood

Every single film, video or series that is released physically deserves to have good encoding irrespective of their artistic merit. There should absolutely be no class consciousness in that regard, whatever the materials, whatever period.

88 decided that Scum is worth investing big bucks into a new scan, HDR grade, sound remixes, extra commissions and the production of a 4K UHD disc. They clearly saw enough sales potential in the film to go "all-in" with it independent of any visual characteristics.

Budgets still exist. If they didn't, a label would not last very long. Same reason we see numerous movies released on 1080p Blu-ray when the restoration was 4K.

[nicwood]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Budgets still exist. If they didn't, a label would not last very long. Same reason we see numerous movies released on 1080p Blu-ray when the restoration was 4K.

That doesn’t invalidate what I’m talking about. You’re making worthiness and classifications of certain "types" of films the principle, which is an elitist point of view that thankfully outdates more and more these days. At the end of the day, a 4K master is a 4K master, whether the film inside was directed by Kubrick, Alan Clarke, Russ Meyer or my grandma and that is the basis to work from. Everything that’s being put on disc deserves the best and of course that’s not happening - otherwise we wouldn’t have this conversation.

In labels’ and studios’ workflows, the encode is one item out of dozens of other things in a budget, yet its relevance for us "consumers" is of absolute importance that can make or break a release, irrespective of whether you notice the issues or not. If budgets were that tight, they’d have already found a way to encode via Handbrake instead of commissioning other parties to do the work for them.